ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Asrg] US Spam patents: Partial list

2003-06-16 19:23:05
Alan,

Let me refine what I said: discussions on whether a given idea is
patentable or not, or whether a patent holder has a right to a given
patent, are not productive to this list because those questions are best
answered by those skilled in the art/science of patent filing.  With
that, my responses are:


"Peter Kay" <peter(_at_)titankey(_dot_)com> wrote:
I think those type of comments and questions about what is 
patentable 
or not are unproductive to this list,

  Discussions of prior art for anti-spam patents should be 
explicitely on-topic for this list.


I agree.  

Unless you're a seasoned patent attorney, patent examiner, 
or one that 
has submitted several patents and gone through the 
examination process 
many times, all one can offer is something less than a "armchair 
quarterback" opinion that will typically lead to even more guessing 
and we'll end up getting excited over nothing.

  So people with experience in a technical field are 
unqualified to discuss technology in their field, as soon as 
the magic word "patent" appears.  

No. But techncal people do not have the knowledge to productively
discuss the legality and/or enforecability of a patent.

However, people 
knowledgable in the areas of patents are qualified to discuss 
technology in *other* peoples fields, even when those 
patent-people are manifestly untrained, and inexperienced in 
those fields.


No. Those skilled in patents can tell you about the patent but probably
can't describe the underlying technology that is contained within the
patent.

Asking technical people for their opinions on the patent process is 
like asking laypeople to comment on complex software architecture: 
you'll get comments that are completely out of scope and 
wildly incorrect.

  Asking technical people for their opinions of the TECHNICAL 
MERITS of patents is always appropriate.


I agree. Technical merits, yes. Prior art, yes. Patent enforcability
and/or validity, probably not.

  ASRG is attempting to resolve the consent exchange issue, 
for email.  Patents which limit the available solutions 
should be discussed.  Patents which have prior art should 
also be discussed.


I agree. And add this: "discussions of whether a given patent is
enforceable or legitimate SHOULD not be discussed".

Peter


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg